Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[sl]

what is the point of this exercise?

sl

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Mayuresh Kathe]

On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 11:49:19PM -0400, sl@9front.org wrote:
> what is the point of this exercise?

to provide an easy to install plan9port based system.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Iruatã Souza]

On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 10:15 PM Mayuresh Kathe <mayuresh@kathe.in> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 11:49:19PM -0400, sl@9front.org wrote:
> > what is the point of this exercise?
>
> to provide an easy to install plan9port based system.
>
>

I suggest you check this list's archives first.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Aram Hăvărneanu]

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:49 AM,  <sl@9front.org> wrote:
> what is the point of this exercise?
>

To appear stupid, apparently,

-- 
Aram Hăvărneanu

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Rui Carmo]

I wouldn’t allow the passive-aggressive mood that surfaces here from time to time to turn me off the project. 

That said, I’m fascinated by how often (and how quickly) some threads devolve into “there is no point in doing that” or “we don’t need those modern contraptions” arguments - reminds me a lot of some of the hard boiled academia types I used to work with back when VMS started losing ground. 

As much as some folk here are not exactly fond of various nuances of modern tech (from Linux to X to git, etc.),  I don’t think there’s any need for dissing personal efforts to use or improve various aspects of Plan9 (including, horror of horrors, making the user land a bit more modern and usable, or at least more accessible to mainstream users).

I’m just going to fetch my vitriol wiper now.

R.

> On 4 Oct 2018, at 08:38, Aram Hăvărneanu <aram.h@mgk.ro> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:49 AM,  <sl@9front.org> wrote:
>> what is the point of this exercise?
>> 
> 
> To appear stupid, apparently,
> 
> -- 
> Aram Hăvărneanu
> 

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Ethan Gardener]

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, at 8:50 AM, Rui Carmo wrote:
> I wouldn’t allow the passive-aggressive mood that surfaces here from 
> time to time to turn me off the project. 
> 
> That said, I’m fascinated by how often (and how quickly) some threads 
> devolve into “there is no point in doing that” or “we don’t need those 
> modern contraptions” arguments - reminds me a lot of some of the hard 
> boiled academia types I used to work with back when VMS started losing 
> ground. 

I think a lot of us are hard boiled academic types, whether we've been through academia or not. :)

> As much as some folk here are not exactly fond of various nuances of 
> modern tech (from Linux to X to git, etc.),  I don’t think there’s any 
> need for dissing personal efforts to use or improve various aspects of 
> Plan9 (including, horror of horrors, making the user land a bit more 
> modern and usable, or at least more accessible to mainstream users).

My perspective is, "More modern or more usable, which do you mean?" :)  Many years ago, when I was under constant stress and had healed far less than I have now, modern GUIs were, in practice, the uttermost extreme of unusability!  The situation improved as I healed, as mouse technology improved, and as the worst excesses of 80s/90s GUI practice diminished somewhat, but I still find them insanely restrictive and awkward for the most part.  Even the parts which I find helpful are delivered in an awkward way, such as menus.

Then there's the question of what Mayuresh is trying to do.  His goal necessarily necessarily includes retaining parts of Linux which I've found through experience to be horrible!  Some of these parts would be the same in various BSDs; the userland for them is the same.  In some of these cases GUIs actually improve the situation, but Mayuresh's plan is to exclude those GUIs; you cannot have them with "minimal xorg".  As far as I'm concerned, the way of minimal POSIX is the way of pain.  Other people with different aptitudes may find it easier, I suppose.

-- 
Progress might have been all right once, but it has gone on too long -- Ogden Nash

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Kurt H Maier]

On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 08:50:35AM +0100, Rui Carmo wrote:
> I wouldn’t allow the passive-aggressive mood that surfaces here from 
> time to time to turn me off the project. 

How about regular aggressive?

Starting with "what project?"  We're gonna slap down an alpine rootfs
and throw plan9port in /bin? Every single person on this list has heard 
this exact "idea" with this exact lack of coherent expression at least 
twelve times before, probably from me.

The problem here is, in a record few number of posts, this person has
demonstrated a desire to mix two operationg systems while demonstrating
fundamental misunderstandings of both of them -- then in some kind of
incompetence coup de gras, managed to display an utter ignorance of
software development en route.  A fine display of efficiency! most
Kickstarter projects, for instance, take years to demonstrate this
degree of overconfident ineptitude! 

This sort of garbage post results in flames because it's
attention-seeking nonsense of the kind that generates many upvotes on
web forums, but no actual goddamn software. 

> That said, I’m fascinated by how often (and how quickly) some threads 
> devolve into “there is no point in doing that” or “we don’t need 
> those modern contraptions” arguments - reminds me a lot of some of 
> the hard boiled academia types I used to work with back when VMS 
> started losing ground. 

You're not fascinated by shit; that's a medium- to low-quality
rhetorical dodge to throw mud at straw men.  Stand by your opinions,
soldier -- you don't get bonus points for fake rumination.  For the 
record, I think it's a fine idea, but this guy isn't the one who's 
gonna cross that finish line.  Not this decade, at least, and I'd 
lay good money that it's not next decade, either.

If nothing else, by the time you get a decent clip down this road, you
come to understand why the locals were laughing as you passed them.

> As much as some folk here are not exactly fond of various nuances of 
> modern tech (from Linux to X to git, etc.),  I don’t think there’s 
> any need for dissing personal efforts to use or improve various 
> aspects of Plan9 (including, horror of horrors, making the user land 
> a bit more modern and usable, or at least more accessible to 
> mainstream users).

Efforts?  More hypothesizing? or is there some effort happening
somewhere here?  Anyway, needlessly or not, I'm not dissing any effort.
I'm dissing a person; 100% USDA Prime Ad Hominem, just ask Irving Copi 
if it ain't.  

You know what the best part is?  If I've got it all wrong, and this
person is indeed the Palamedes who will round out our unixy alphabet,
then I'll still get to use the software.  So let's all hope I'm wrong!

But I'm not.

> I’m just going to fetch my vitriol wiper now.

Happy to help,

khm

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Rui Carmo]

I’ll bite, partially because I’m used to finding resistance to exploratory ideas and learning paths, but mostly because I find this kind of passionate, biased argument fascinating in tech contexts...

> On 4 Oct 2018, at 09:50, Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 08:50:35AM +0100, Rui Carmo wrote:
>> I wouldn’t allow the passive-aggressive mood that surfaces here from 
>> time to time to turn me off the project. 
> 
> How about regular aggressive?

Regular aggressive is taking things outside the realm of civilised discourse, which is easy to do behind a keyboard, since being irate at abstract things seems to be a slippery slope when removed from regular human contact.

However, it is not really acceptable, even with an attempt at (biased) logic behind it.

> Starting with "what project?"  We're gonna slap down an alpine rootfs
> and throw plan9port in /bin? Every single person on this list has heard 
> this exact "idea" with this exact lack of coherent expression at least 
> twelve times before, probably from me.

And the problem with doing that as a learning experience or for the purpose of having better tooling is exactly… what?

> The problem here is, in a record few number of posts, this person has
> demonstrated a desire to mix two operationg systems while demonstrating
> fundamental misunderstandings of both of them -- then in some kind of
> incompetence coup de gras,

You meant “grace” (pronounced “grasse”), not “greasy”, as in “foie de gras”. I can understand that mastery of foreign languages might slip away under the kind of blood pressure involved in your original reply.

> managed to display an utter ignorance of
> software development en route.  A fine display of efficiency! most
> Kickstarter projects, for instance, take years to demonstrate this
> degree of overconfident ineptitude! 

Ignorance takes many forms, such as lack of empathy (which can translate in some contexts to “emotional ignorance”). The attempt at drawing parallels with Kickstarter (and the implicit bias against experimentation and focusing only on failures) is amusing, but telling.

> This sort of garbage post results in flames because it's
> attention-seeking nonsense of the kind that generates many upvotes on
> web forums, but no actual goddamn software. 

This isn’t a web forum. It is a mailing-list, and as such (as I would like to think) one of the last bastions of measured, rational discourse on today’s Internet (ok, there was ample precedent for flame wars in FidoNet, and we can gloss over the Usenet massacres, but I think my point has a chance of getting across). You are not helping to set a positive tone.

>> That said, I’m fascinated by how often (and how quickly) some threads 
>> devolve into “there is no point in doing that” or “we don’t need 
>> those modern contraptions” arguments - reminds me a lot of some of 
>> the hard boiled academia types I used to work with back when VMS 
>> started losing ground. 
> 
> You're not fascinated by shit; that's a medium- to low-quality
> rhetorical dodge to throw mud at straw men.  Stand by your opinions,
> soldier -- you don't get bonus points for fake rumination.  For the 
> record, I think it's a fine idea, but this guy isn't the one who's 
> gonna cross that finish line.  Not this decade, at least, and I'd 
> lay good money that it's not next decade, either.

And yet, if no-one tries, nobody will ever deliver on it.

> If nothing else, by the time you get a decent clip down this road, you
> come to understand why the locals were laughing as you passed them.

History is filled with people who were laughed at and changed (even if in small ways) the world we live in. Being able to remember that is what separates civilised cultures from biased, negative cultures that prey on (and anticipate) failure for the sake of entertainment. Ancient Rome comes to mind here.

>> As much as some folk here are not exactly fond of various nuances of 
>> modern tech (from Linux to X to git, etc.),  I don’t think there’s 
>> any need for dissing personal efforts to use or improve various 
>> aspects of Plan9 (including, horror of horrors, making the user land 
>> a bit more modern and usable, or at least more accessible to 
>> mainstream users).
> 
> Efforts?  More hypothesizing? or is there some effort happening
> somewhere here?  Anyway, needlessly or not, I'm not dissing any effort.
> I'm dissing a person; 100% USDA Prime Ad Hominem, just ask Irving Copi 
> if it ain't.  

I parsed that as the Dept. of Agriculture until I realised there were no animal husbandry puns to fit this situation. Regardless, I fully expected a red “let’s make Plan9 great” again baseball cap to emerge from this argument. Not being a political partisan, I’m not going to go there, and point out that ad hominem is always a way to introduce fallacy when genuine arguments don’t hold water (or alcohol).

> You know what the best part is?  If I've got it all wrong, and this
> person is indeed the Palamedes who will round out our unixy alphabet,
> then I'll still get to use the software.  So let's all hope I'm wrong!

Let’s.

> But I'm not.

You might. Failure to recognise the odds that you are says a lot.

>> I’m just going to fetch my vitriol wiper now.
> 
> Happy to help,

Loved this bout of sparring. Reminds me of when I believed technology alone could save the world, until I figured out that people (and how you relate to them) is the whole point of doing most of what actually matters.

Cheers,

R.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Iruatã Souza]

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 3:35 AM Rui Carmo <rui.carmo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I’ll bite, partially because I’m used to finding resistance to exploratory ideas and learning paths, but mostly because I find this kind of passionate, biased argument fascinating in tech contexts...
>
> > On 4 Oct 2018, at 09:50, Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 08:50:35AM +0100, Rui Carmo wrote:
> >> I wouldn’t allow the passive-aggressive mood that surfaces here from
> >> time to time to turn me off the project.
> >
> > How about regular aggressive?
>
> Regular aggressive is taking things outside the realm of civilised discourse, which is easy to do behind a keyboard, since being irate at abstract things seems to be a slippery slope when removed from regular human contact.
>
> However, it is not really acceptable, even with an attempt at (biased) logic behind it.
>
> > Starting with "what project?"  We're gonna slap down an alpine rootfs
> > and throw plan9port in /bin? Every single person on this list has heard
> > this exact "idea" with this exact lack of coherent expression at least
> > twelve times before, probably from me.
>
> And the problem with doing that as a learning experience or for the purpose of having better tooling is exactly… what?
>
> > The problem here is, in a record few number of posts, this person has
> > demonstrated a desire to mix two operationg systems while demonstrating
> > fundamental misunderstandings of both of them -- then in some kind of
> > incompetence coup de gras,
>
> You meant “grace” (pronounced “grasse”), not “greasy”, as in “foie de gras”. I can understand that mastery of foreign languages might slip away under the kind of blood pressure involved in your original reply.
>
> > managed to display an utter ignorance of
> > software development en route.  A fine display of efficiency! most
> > Kickstarter projects, for instance, take years to demonstrate this
> > degree of overconfident ineptitude!
>
> Ignorance takes many forms, such as lack of empathy (which can translate in some contexts to “emotional ignorance”). The attempt at drawing parallels with Kickstarter (and the implicit bias against experimentation and focusing only on failures) is amusing, but telling.
>
> > This sort of garbage post results in flames because it's
> > attention-seeking nonsense of the kind that generates many upvotes on
> > web forums, but no actual goddamn software.
>
> This isn’t a web forum. It is a mailing-list, and as such (as I would like to think) one of the last bastions of measured, rational discourse on today’s Internet (ok, there was ample precedent for flame wars in FidoNet, and we can gloss over the Usenet massacres, but I think my point has a chance of getting across). You are not helping to set a positive tone.
>
> >> That said, I’m fascinated by how often (and how quickly) some threads
> >> devolve into “there is no point in doing that” or “we don’t need
> >> those modern contraptions” arguments - reminds me a lot of some of
> >> the hard boiled academia types I used to work with back when VMS
> >> started losing ground.
> >
> > You're not fascinated by shit; that's a medium- to low-quality
> > rhetorical dodge to throw mud at straw men.  Stand by your opinions,
> > soldier -- you don't get bonus points for fake rumination.  For the
> > record, I think it's a fine idea, but this guy isn't the one who's
> > gonna cross that finish line.  Not this decade, at least, and I'd
> > lay good money that it's not next decade, either.
>
> And yet, if no-one tries, nobody will ever deliver on it.
>

Except that many people have tried. And failed. Experimentation is
wonderful, but one should always understand the previous efforts.

> > If nothing else, by the time you get a decent clip down this road, you
> > come to understand why the locals were laughing as you passed them.
>
> History is filled with people who were laughed at and changed (even if in small ways) the world we live in. Being able to remember that is what separates civilised cultures from biased, negative cultures that prey on (and anticipate) failure for the sake of entertainment. Ancient Rome comes to mind here.
>
> >> As much as some folk here are not exactly fond of various nuances of
> >> modern tech (from Linux to X to git, etc.),  I don’t think there’s
> >> any need for dissing personal efforts to use or improve various
> >> aspects of Plan9 (including, horror of horrors, making the user land
> >> a bit more modern and usable, or at least more accessible to
> >> mainstream users).
> >
> > Efforts?  More hypothesizing? or is there some effort happening
> > somewhere here?  Anyway, needlessly or not, I'm not dissing any effort.
> > I'm dissing a person; 100% USDA Prime Ad Hominem, just ask Irving Copi
> > if it ain't.
>
> I parsed that as the Dept. of Agriculture until I realised there were no animal husbandry puns to fit this situation. Regardless, I fully expected a red “let’s make Plan9 great” again baseball cap to emerge from this argument. Not being a political partisan, I’m not going to go there, and point out that ad hominem is always a way to introduce fallacy when genuine arguments don’t hold water (or alcohol).
>
> > You know what the best part is?  If I've got it all wrong, and this
> > person is indeed the Palamedes who will round out our unixy alphabet,
> > then I'll still get to use the software.  So let's all hope I'm wrong!
>
> Let’s.
>
> > But I'm not.
>
> You might. Failure to recognise the odds that you are says a lot.
>
> >> I’m just going to fetch my vitriol wiper now.
> >
> > Happy to help,
>
> Loved this bout of sparring. Reminds me of when I believed technology alone could save the world, until I figured out that people (and how you relate to them) is the whole point of doing most of what actually matters.
>
> Cheers,
>
> R.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[hiro]

the longer you argue here the harder it will be for you to find time
to proves us all wrong.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Steve Simon]

good grief guys.

can we all just play nice? there no need to get personal, if you don't like an idea say so an explain why.

if you cannot be bothered to be grown up, then just keep quiet.

-Steve

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Aram Hăvărneanu]

OH MY GOD, I installed plan9port so hard right now.

-- 
Aram Hăvărneanu

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Steven Stallion]

I'm beginning to wonder if anyone is left that isn't part of 9front?
This behavior is caustic and does nothing but continue to shrink the
size of this list. At this point, I'm considering dropping off as
others have given the attitudes that seem so prevalent these days.
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 1:05 PM Steve Simon <steve@quintile.net> wrote:
>
> good grief guys.
>
> can we all just play nice? there no need to get personal, if you don't like an idea say so an explain why.
>
> if you cannot be bothered to be grown up, then just keep quiet.
>
> -Steve
>
>
>

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Skip Tavakkolian]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1023 bytes --]

Based on my personal observations of extermist behavior of various sort
(social, technical, religious), I think we can look forward to bifurcation
adinfinitum until the last man.

On this subject, if someone wants to do something for his/her own pleasure
and edification, I can't see what harm it causes me or what I do.

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 12:22 PM Steven Stallion <sstallion@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm beginning to wonder if anyone is left that isn't part of 9front?
> This behavior is caustic and does nothing but continue to shrink the
> size of this list. At this point, I'm considering dropping off as
> others have given the attitudes that seem so prevalent these days.
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 1:05 PM Steve Simon <steve@quintile.net> wrote:
> >
> > good grief guys.
> >
> > can we all just play nice? there no need to get personal, if you don't
> like an idea say so an explain why.
> >
> > if you cannot be bothered to be grown up, then just keep quiet.
> >
> > -Steve
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1507 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[hiro]

just add something positive then

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Steven Stallion]

Communication is not a zero-sum game. Having a public mailing list is
an invitation for discussion amongst likeminded individuals, not
elitist fuckery.

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 3:50 PM hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> just add something positive then
>

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Alexander Keller]

Don't worry, these arguments happen, have happened, and will continue. Ham radio for example has the saying, "The only thing two hams can agree on is the third is a fool." The only difference is that text divorces empathy from the discussion.

Best way to help, if you don't think someone's idea has some potential, ignore it. Trying to explain why you think it won't work or worse, shouldn't be done, only makes a person feel prosecuted. Text comes off devoid of compassion and often makes the contributor feel attacked. Even in person, it's hard to pull off kind rejection.

Often, people given no support in an effort will grow to understand there is no desire for it and give up. If they do end up persevering, power to them! Maybe they're right and you don't see it. People will band around things they believe in.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[hiro]

feel free to build your own community based on ignoring things.
there's a lot to learn from one another, and you can overcome bad
emotions with long-term technical acchievements, passion and
friendship.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Aram Hăvărneanu]

> given the attitudes that seem so prevalent these days.

You are mistaken, it has always been like this.

-- 
Aram Hăvărneanu

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Kurt H Maier]

On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 11:33:33AM +0100, Rui Carmo wrote:
> 
> Regular aggressive is taking things outside the realm of civilised discourse,
> which is easy to do behind a keyboard, since being irate at abstract things
> seems to be a slippery slope when removed from regular human contact.

Nah, I do it in person too.  But nice try!

> However, it is not really acceptable, even with an attempt at (biased) logic
> behind it.

Disagree.

> And the problem with doing that as a learning experience or for the purpose
> of having better tooling is exactly… what?

None.  But I don't see any learning, and I don't see any better tooling,
and that's my point.  This is just noise.

> You meant “grace” (pronounced “grasse”), not “greasy”, as in “foie de gras”.
> I can understand that mastery of foreign languages might slip away under the
> kind of blood pressure involved in your original reply.

You read my email, and you concluded that I meant to describe grace?  If
I can borrow your favorite word, that conclusion is fascinating.

> Ignorance takes many forms, such as lack of empathy (which can translate in
> some contexts to “emotional ignorance”). The attempt at drawing parallels
> with Kickstarter (and the implicit bias against experimentation and focusing
> only on failures) is amusing, but telling.

Lack of empathy can be just as easily a deliberate decision.  Why do you
tacitly discount this possibility?  

> This isn’t a web forum. It is a mailing-list, and as such (as I would like to
> think) one of the last bastions of measured, rational discourse on today’s
> Internet (ok, there was ample precedent for flame wars in FidoNet, and we can
> gloss over the Usenet massacres, but I think my point has a chance of getting
> across). You are not helping to set a positive tone.

I do not want to set a positive tone.  I want the programming fanfiction
to go away.  And I know this isn't a web forum.  That's why I
highlighted the weblike nature of the posting in question:  to indicate
it is out of place on a mailing list.  Much like your pearl-clutching
about civility.  

> And yet, if no-one tries, nobody will ever deliver on it.

And yet, if this person tries, nobody will still have delivered on it.
That was kind of the thesis of my message, remember?

> History is filled with people who were laughed at and changed (even if in
> small ways) the world we live in. Being able to remember that is what
> separates civilised cultures from biased, negative cultures that prey on (and
> anticipate) failure for the sake of entertainment. Ancient Rome comes to mind
> here.

Entertainment?  I'm trying to help this person fail in isolation, far
from prying eyes!  I don't want to watch this train wreck, or hear about
it at all.  That's my whole point!  Let the dreams die with some
dignity.

> I parsed that as the Dept. of Agriculture until I realised there were no
> animal husbandry puns to fit this situation. Regardless, I fully expected a
> red “let’s make Plan9 great” again baseball cap to emerge from this argument.
> Not being a political partisan, I’m not going to go there, and point out that
> ad hominem is always a way to introduce fallacy when genuine arguments don’t
> hold water (or alcohol).

I don't know how to be clearer:  my low opinion of this person is
precisely the 'argument' I am presenting.  It can't be a fallacy if it's
a premise.  The conclusion ("this will not happen") follows quite
naturally from the major premise ("idiots never actually execute their
plans") and the minor premise ("this guy is an idiot").  Seems
straightforward, despite your awkard and irrelevant political ramblings.

> You might. Failure to recognise the odds that you are says a lot.

I'm not going to apologize for confidence.  It comes of a moderate
amount of experience, hearing this same noise on a thousand
communications media, all from people who claim to be performing a
'learning exercise' or some such.  Some have delivered.  This person
does not demonstrate the characteristics of that capability.

> Loved this bout of sparring. Reminds me of when I believed technology alone
> could save the world, until I figured out that people (and how you relate to
> them) is the whole point of doing most of what actually matters.

I can only imagine the wonderful feeling that must have accompanied a
belief that anything can save the world, but declining to relate to
unproductive noisemakers is a policy that has consistently served me
very well.

Every once in a while, I am surprised.  When that happens, I get better
tools, and a few people get to savor the knowledge that I was wrong
about something.  It's a fair trade.

khm

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[sl]

[9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Mayuresh Kathe]

i had been trying to work with a collaborator to develop a complete,
installable system for plan9port.

while initially being quite gung-ho about linux, an accidental discovery
and ensuing experiements show the freebsd environment to be a lot more
performant and responsive, almost as much as netbsd for something like a
plan9port system.

wish to ask the community that if such a system were to be successfully
developed and distributed with source and free of cost, would it be
welcomed or most would not even bother to look at?

also, if there's enough interest, would there be someone out here
capable enough to support netbsd-amd64?

thanks,

~mayuresh

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Lucio De Re]

> also, if there's enough interest, would there be someone out here
> capable enough to support netbsd-amd64?

I haven't got around to installing p9p on my fresh NetBSD/64 system
yet, for now it is just a PostgreSQL host.

But I can help and I may just need a shove to get on with things.

No big promises, though.

Lucio.

--
Lucio De Re
2 Piet Retief St
Kestell (Eastern Free State)
9860 South Africa

Ph.: +27 58 653 1433
Cell: +27 83 251 5824
FAX: +27 58 653 1435

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Mayuresh Kathe]

On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 02:01:12PM +0200, Lucio De Re wrote:
> > also, if there's enough interest, would there be someone out here
> > capable enough to support netbsd-amd64?
>
> [snip]
> But I can help and I may just need a shove to get on with things.

by shove, do you mean a reminder?
if yes, do let me know how often and from which date, i'll manage.

~mayuresh

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Lucio De Re]

How soon would you start needing some form of support back-up?

It's a little random around these places, which is why promises are
hard to keep.

Lucio.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Mayuresh Kathe]

On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 02:43:51PM +0200, Lucio De Re wrote:
> How soon would you start needing some form of support back-up?
>
> It's a little random around these places, which is why promises are
> hard to keep.

no worries, i am thinking of sticking with linux, it's the most well
supported platform for plan9port.

thanks for your kind offer for help.

~mayuresh

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Roderick]

I think it is uninteresting: one can always install plan9port in a
meager installation of openbsd, freebsd or linux.

More interesting is to have the original plan9 and perhaps a virtual
machine on it to run one of the above OS and their software.

Unfortunately I am having problems installing plan9. It seems to be
very selective on the hardware.

Rodrigo




On Tue, 2 Oct 2018, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:

> i had been trying to work with a collaborator to develop a complete,
> installable system for plan9port.
>
> while initially being quite gung-ho about linux, an accidental discovery
> and ensuing experiements show the freebsd environment to be a lot more
> performant and responsive, almost as much as netbsd for something like a
> plan9port system.
>
> wish to ask the community that if such a system were to be successfully
> developed and distributed with source and free of cost, would it be
> welcomed or most would not even bother to look at?
>
> also, if there's enough interest, would there be someone out here
> capable enough to support netbsd-amd64?
>
> thanks,
>
> ~mayuresh
>
>
>

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[hiro]

which plan9, did you try 9front?

On 10/2/18, Roderick <hruodr@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think it is uninteresting: one can always install plan9port in a
> meager installation of openbsd, freebsd or linux.
>
> More interesting is to have the original plan9 and perhaps a virtual
> machine on it to run one of the above OS and their software.
>
> Unfortunately I am having problems installing plan9. It seems to be
> very selective on the hardware.
>
> Rodrigo
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2018, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>
>> i had been trying to work with a collaborator to develop a complete,
>> installable system for plan9port.
>>
>> while initially being quite gung-ho about linux, an accidental discovery
>> and ensuing experiements show the freebsd environment to be a lot more
>> performant and responsive, almost as much as netbsd for something like a
>> plan9port system.
>>
>> wish to ask the community that if such a system were to be successfully
>> developed and distributed with source and free of cost, would it be
>> welcomed or most would not even bother to look at?
>>
>> also, if there's enough interest, would there be someone out here
>> capable enough to support netbsd-amd64?
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> ~mayuresh
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Roderick]

On Tue, 2 Oct 2018, hiro wrote:

> which plan9, did you try 9front?

The original from Bell Labs. I had it installed in a very old
computer, but in newer ones hopeless. Is 9front less selective?

Rodrigo

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Iruatã Souza]

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:57 AM Roderick <hruodr@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I think it is uninteresting: one can always install plan9port in a
> meager installation of openbsd, freebsd or linux.
>
> More interesting is to have the original plan9 and perhaps a virtual
> machine on it to run one of the above OS and their software.
>

9front can run virtualized linux and openbsd.

> Unfortunately I am having problems installing plan9. It seems to be
> very selective on the hardware.
>
> Rodrigo
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2018, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>
> > i had been trying to work with a collaborator to develop a complete,
> > installable system for plan9port.
> >
> > while initially being quite gung-ho about linux, an accidental discovery
> > and ensuing experiements show the freebsd environment to be a lot more
> > performant and responsive, almost as much as netbsd for something like a
> > plan9port system.
> >
> > wish to ask the community that if such a system were to be successfully
> > developed and distributed with source and free of cost, would it be
> > welcomed or most would not even bother to look at?
> >
> > also, if there's enough interest, would there be someone out here
> > capable enough to support netbsd-amd64?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > ~mayuresh
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Dave MacFarlane]

What do you mean by "a complete, installable system for plan9ports"?

If you mean one that uses p9p in place of gnu utils, that's something
I've thought about
trying to do before, but I'd suggest taking it one step further and
seeing if you could use
a 9p root filesystem and see how far you can take the per process
namespaces of Linux
to make it feel like Plan 9. (AFAIK, that wouldn't be possible with
NetBSD or FreeBSD, but
I might be mistaken..)

- Dave
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:32 AM Mayuresh Kathe <mayuresh@kathe.in> wrote:
>
> i had been trying to work with a collaborator to develop a complete,
> installable system for plan9port.
>
> while initially being quite gung-ho about linux, an accidental discovery
> and ensuing experiements show the freebsd environment to be a lot more
> performant and responsive, almost as much as netbsd for something like a
> plan9port system.
>
> wish to ask the community that if such a system were to be successfully
> developed and distributed with source and free of cost, would it be
> welcomed or most would not even bother to look at?
>
> also, if there's enough interest, would there be someone out here
> capable enough to support netbsd-amd64?
>
> thanks,
>
> ~mayuresh
>
>


--
- Dave

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Ethan Gardener]

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, at 3:41 PM, Dave MacFarlane wrote:
> What do you mean by "a complete, installable system for plan9ports"?

That's my question too!

> If you mean one that uses p9p in place of gnu utils, that's something
> I've thought about
> trying to do before, but I'd suggest taking it one step further and
> seeing if you could use
> a 9p root filesystem and see how far you can take the per process
> namespaces of Linux
> to make it feel like Plan 9. (AFAIK, that wouldn't be possible with
> NetBSD or FreeBSD, but
> I might be mistaken..)

I had a bit of a go at the shell tools side of things.  It was fun in a way, but I won't pretend the result was as usable as Plan 9, never mind Linux.  It wasn't worth continuing to the point where experimenting with per process namespaces might become interesting.  The same goes for making use of Linux's interesting clone() system call, which afaik close to rfork().

It was just an exercise.  I wasn't expecting too much out of it because I've experimented with minimal Linux before, running LFS from 2001 to 2003 and being involved with a source-based Linux distribution from 2004 to about 2009.  My conclusion was so much interesting software wants the whole bloatware circus that to do without it requires becoming a 1-man patching machine.  This goes all the way into the shell.  A surprising lot of software needs the shell to be the Bourne shell and the various utilities to have POSIX-specified options and behave in POSIX-specified ways.  P9P utilities don't do that.  I also got the idea that the days of hobbyist-maintained Linux distributions are over, that it takes a lot of dedication or a large team.  I personally resolved to use bloatware without paying too much attention to it for "modern" software, and to have my fun with what I call 'island systems' -- not existing to provide services for modern software but rather little universes in themselves.  They can be hosted or emulated, or run on old hardware, I don't care so long as they're not going to stop working or break programs I wrote at the drop of a hat.  P9P could be considered an island system in itself, old operating systems and hardware too, but my current primary choice of island system is Forth.

If, on the other hand, you basically want Plan 9, using Linux as a driver layer, there have been multiple attempts over the years, some with corporate or academic backing, but none of them seem to have worked out.  The guy behind most of them eventually moved on to writing an actual operating system influenced by Plan 9.

-- 
Progress might have been all right once, but it has gone on too long -- Ogden Nash

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Bakul Shah]

> On Oct 2, 2018, at 7:41 AM, Dave MacFarlane <driusan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> see how far you can take the per process
> namespaces of Linux
> to make it feel like Plan 9. (AFAIK, that wouldn't be possible with
> NetBSD or FreeBSD, but
> I might be mistaken..)

Adding per process namespaces to *BSD would be a nontrivial project.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Steve Simon]

maybe this is what you meant, but the glendix project was this - approximately.

Steve

> On 2 Oct 2018, at 6:22 pm, Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Oct 2, 2018, at 7:41 AM, Dave MacFarlane <driusan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> see how far you can take the per process
>> namespaces of Linux
>> to make it feel like Plan 9. (AFAIK, that wouldn't be possible with
>> NetBSD or FreeBSD, but
>> I might be mistaken..)
> 
> Adding per process namespaces to *BSD would be a nontrivial project.

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[hiro]

why do you use the past tense about glendix? is it finished?

On 10/2/18, Steve Simon <steve@quintile.net> wrote:
> maybe this is what you meant, but the glendix project was this -
> approximately.
>
> Steve
>
>> On 2 Oct 2018, at 6:22 pm, Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 2, 2018, at 7:41 AM, Dave MacFarlane <driusan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> see how far you can take the per process
>>> namespaces of Linux
>>> to make it feel like Plan 9. (AFAIK, that wouldn't be possible with
>>> NetBSD or FreeBSD, but
>>> I might be mistaken..)
>>
>> Adding per process namespaces to *BSD would be a nontrivial project.
>
>
>

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Kurt H Maier]

On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 08:10:19PM +0200, hiro wrote:
> why do you use the past tense about glendix? is it finished?

I have a kid in the second grade who was born after the last time anyone
worked on Glendix.

khm

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Aram Hăvărneanu]

> i had been trying to work with a collaborator to develop a complete,
> installable system for plan9port.

Plan9port is already installable.

-- 
Aram Hăvărneanu

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Mayuresh Kathe]

On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 11:23:45PM +0200, Aram Hăvărneanu wrote:
> > i had been trying to work with a collaborator to develop a complete,
> > installable system for plan9port.
> 
> Plan9port is already installable.

aram, by a complete, installable system for plan9port, i meant a
distribution running the linux kernel, bionic, plan9port, minimal xorg.
that distribution would be bootable off a usb disk and can be installed
to your harddisk like any generic gnu/linux distribution.
it is meant for use by those who want a pure plan9port based system and
nothing more, initially. later, as demand mandates, i'll add in
software.

think before you write your emails, you might end up sounding stupid
otherwise.

~mayuresh

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Ethan Gardener]

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, at 4:44 AM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 11:23:45PM +0200, Aram Hăvărneanu wrote:
> > > i had been trying to work with a collaborator to develop a complete,
> > > installable system for plan9port.
> > 
> > Plan9port is already installable.
> 
> aram, by a complete, installable system for plan9port, i meant a
> distribution running the linux kernel, bionic, plan9port, minimal xorg.
> that distribution would be bootable off a usb disk and can be installed
> to your harddisk like any generic gnu/linux distribution.
> it is meant for use by those who want a pure plan9port based system and
> nothing more, initially. later, as demand mandates, i'll add in
> software.

Instance 9000 of shortsightedness in a Plan 9 newbie.  There's nothing strictly wrong with it, but the attitude here of "this is good and i am doing it and i am not listening to any reason or question" is unpleasant.  The big question is "Why?"  It will be less pleasant than running Plan 9 itself, as the user will have to deal with Linux-spawned ideas of how things should be when configuring hardware or network filesystems.  After 20 years of Linux use, these are the parts I *least* want to touch!  It will also be somewhat harder to program, having to deal with standard C libraries and *probably* gcc or clang.  Don't just assume you can compile your libc of choice with your compiler of choice until you've tried it.

> think before you write your emails, you might end up sounding stupid
> otherwise.

LOL!  I needed that laugh, thanks!  Seriously, you failed to make any distinction between what you want to make and what plan9port already is, you refuse to think about what you're doing, and then you deliver this insult!  Please at least try to learn how to communicate basic facts about computer systems before you write documentation for your operating system. :)


Hm... I don't even want to ask if anyone has any current opinions on bionic vs. musl, any more.  Both of them are for Linux, and Linux makes me shudder.


-- 
Progress might have been all right once, but it has gone on too long -- Ogden Nash

Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ?

[Bakul Shah]

On Oct 3, 2018, at 8:44 PM, Mayuresh Kathe <mayuresh@kathe.in> wrote:
>
> aram, by a complete, installable system for plan9port, i meant a
> distribution running the linux kernel, bionic, plan9port, minimal xorg.
> that distribution would be bootable off a usb disk and can be installed
> to your harddisk like any generic gnu/linux distribution.
> it is meant for use by those who want a pure plan9port based system and
> nothing more, initially. later, as demand mandates, i'll add in
> software.

Have you looked at glendix as someone else suggested?

Is there really any demand for what you want to build?
You will be spending a lot more time using a system than
in installation so why spend time on perfecting an
installable system for some imagined user population?
At any rate, you should be clear about *why* you want
this.

If you just want to learn about plan9, bite the bullet
and use a real or virtual machine running plan9.

If you want to run plan9 on a modern machine that is
not supported natively by plan9/9front, run it in a VM.

If you mainly want plan9 but also run programs not
ported to plan9 (such as a browser), running plan9 in a
VM is likely easier than running linux in a VM running
on top of plan9.

If you just want to use acme or rio, you already have
them in the standard p9p. Compiling from source is
pretty easy on *BSD, Linux & MacOS.

If you have Linux kernel + plan9 userland, you'll be
fighting both systems.